French church attacked during Mass, priest murdered [CC]

[simpleas]

That was a great debate, well worth listening to.

youtube.com/watch?v=ghr-JMq1VT0

 

[JosieN]

Good Morning Josie,

I agree, the killing is far worse. However, I was talking about being able to understand.

We can relate to those who kill. For example, look at this question: why do you not kill if you desire someone destroyed? For most people today, we recoil at the thought of actually carrying it out. But what about people who are used to killing, for the purpose of protecting people during war? We hear about a lot of violence from veterans, right? Suicides, murder of spouses, murders in general. These are people who have lost that recoil factor. People used to killing have to be much more vigilant about forgiving.

I can try to relate to those who kill, but in all honesty I do not think I can truly understand it. The only way I could possible understand it is for self defense.

So we can stop with “he enjoys killing” with the implied “he is evil”, which is a condemnation, or we can instead seek to understand. Why does a person enjoy killing? First of all, if it is indiscriminate we are talking about a person we would label a “sociopath” or a “psychopath”. These people have a greatly compromised ability to empathize, so their own consciences have not been formed. These people can learn to function in society because they find out that bad behaviors will lead to being put in jail or lessen their status in society, but compassion for others is greatly limited. They are incapable of seeing the inherent value of people. We generally find no inherent value in houseflies, right? These people see others as having the value of houseflies.

For the sociopath the “joy” comes in the feeling of being in control, in dominating. Control and domination is his motive. Because their empathy is extremely compromised, they feel no remorse.

Have you ever been on a mosquito killing-spree? It can be very satisfying. I do not empathize with mosquitoes. “Sociopaths” do not empathize with people, they see no inherent value in people. We can understand this without condoning it.

I have not been on a mosquito killing-spree. I only kill them because they are pests, they are not human. If these sociopaths think of humans in the same way as we think of mosquitoes then they have a dark soul, only an empty dark soul, could carry out such sick behavior as mass murdering, especially when they kill young children. Even the thought of it makes me sick inside. I do not wish to judge their behaviors, but really how does understanding them better help their soul?

With understanding we can forgive in a deeper way, and actually have a merciful heart toward a sociopath. What they “deserve” is an uncompromised ability to empathize, but for reason of brain development or adverse nurture, they have very little ability.

As for the parents pain and loss, we are to pray for them and grieve with them. Punishment never makes the loss go away. Hopefully, they can eventually forgive. It takes time.

I think you see the human side of things, and not the spiritual side, and I am looking at the spiritual side. The human spirit is alive in us and at the center of it is our heart.

CCC 368 “The spiritual tradition of the Church also emphasizes the heart, in the biblical sense of the depths of one’s being, where the person decides for or against God.”

When you have decided to murder someone without a just cause, clearly you are deciding against God and His laws. In my way of thinking, I would ask God to have mercy on a murderer’s soul as only God can heal the soul, and your way of thinking you would try to understand him yourself and have a merciful heart towards a sociopath, and you think finding a cure is the answer. What if the reason he kills is because the devil has taken hold of his heart? No amount of your forgiveness can heal that. I would put it in God’s Hands.

 

[JosieN]

continued

[/QU[COLOR=“Blue”] Matthew 19:26New International Version (NIV)

26 Jesus looked at them and said, “With man this is impossible, but with God all things are possible.”

I was looking at the word “only”. Perhaps you are emphasizing the opposite, “with man this is possible, but with God it is impossible?” You may be expressing a different image of God, but like I have often said here: if so, it is a legitimate view. Note: I am not saying that there is no value in praying for sinners. There is great value in praying!

Here is the whole paragraph I wrote regarding a person’s way to salvation and healing, I think you were only using part of it, and that may be why you seem to have understood me incorrectly or maybe I did not explain clearly what I meant to say,

If one asks God for forgiveness and mercy, it is because of His Son’s sacrifice on the cross that it is possible to have forgiveness, but a person who does not believe in Jesus Christ will not ask unless we pray for his soul and for his conversion to the true faith, and this is the only way to salvation for him. a contrite heart and repentance and healing from Jesus Christ will repair this type of person’s damaged soul. God knows what is in his heart, we do not. We are not to assume reasons for any murders, as we can not truly know them or understand them.

What I was saying is that** it is possible **because of Jesus Christ God’s Son, for this murderer to be healed, but a person like a murderer will not come to Jesus Christ on his own, he will need our prayers. Yes I agree nothing is impossible for God, but how can a sinner turn his life around without the graces he needs to make that choice? The answer is in our prayers, for when we pray God listens to our hearts and prayers.

Yes, he did not deserve to die, but we can come to understand why the murderer did what he did to the best of our ability, to the point that we can forgive in a deeper way.

We need to ask God to have mercy on the killer of the priest, it is God’s forgiveness that is needed, not our forgiveness of this person. We need to pray “Lord have mercy”. Too much emphasis is being placed on the human side, we need to say “Have mercy on him Lord and forgive him” when someone does evil to another, Jesus Christ is the one who heals us and forgives, He is the one who died on the cross for us.

Thank you for your continued responses, I am enjoying your challenging questions and statements!

Thank you! I am glad you are enjoying my comments and questions. Hopefully we are making progress on understanding each other better.

 

[OneSheep]

Good Morning Francis,

I guess the way I see the subject we are discussing as a public problem of justice, whereas you seem to see it as a private concern of mercy.

This is about justice from all points of view. Everyone involved has suffered injustice, and many involved have also acted unjustly. Depending on whose side people are on, they have a tendency to emphasize the injustice that happened to their own, and the injustices carried out by the other - this is all public, and private.

All people of all governments should be concerned about mercy. It is the way we are to walk. Do you see what I mean? We are needing a complete change in mindset.

To me, governments primarily in the ME, and secondarily elsewhere, should be doing something about ISIS in order to protect the current and future victims. This is a matter of strategy and war.

And it also may seem unjust that they do not do more, right? So we go back to the question, “Why don’t they do more?”. There is an answer; one that eventually leads to the finding that people are doing what they think is best.

If Catholics and/or the Church want to engage members of ISIS on a different level, it is a *separate *endeavour. Personally, I think the immediate need is help for those affected by ISIS, the victims, the displaced, etc. To me, this should be the first priority, which should not go so far as to prioritize medical treatment on the basis of affiliation, but which should generally concentrate on helping victims.

Well, the Spirit guides us, hopefully, as to when the time is right to focus on forgiveness, but I agree, there are immediate concerns.

I can see a place for individuals and groups within the Church to engage with actual members of ISIS; at least a few saints have done this. I just don’t think it is practical unless the RIs are locked up.

So when I talk about “the problem,” I am talking about how governments and other institutions should act regarding the ghastly victimization of people in the ME, on an institutional level, and you seem to be talking about how individuals should act.

But do you see? If those acting governments and institutions engage with forgiveness in mind, the whole picture transforms. We Christians and others who see the same can encourage this.

Their desire to build a mosque in or over a church is a sign of their enmity to us, their conquest of us, a victory over us. Should we allow *that? *

I suppose the same could be said by a Saudi citizen, if a Church is allowed to be constructed over there. It is already bad enough that our troops were there, he might see that a Church would be the beginning of a conquest.

Let’s go back to “Do unto others as he would have them do unto us.” Would we prefer that the Saudi citizen give voice to the maligned Christian who says “we have a Church in Saudi Arabia now, the beginning of the conversion of the Arabian Peninsula has begun”, or do we give voice to the Christian who is grateful to the Saudi government for allowing resident Christians a place of worship? Once you have answered this, turn it around.

The problem is that we have been dealing with the RIs as if they are like us. They take advantage of our openness to incrementally move in. (Note: I am not talking about all Moslems, just some.) Look at what CAIR did with its “curriculum:” can you imagine any US public school encouraging students to fast for Lent, to memorize the Shecharit?

At some point, it is necessary to deal with them in line with their thinking, because otherwise, they will not understand our communications.

This is the way that people have justified doing very evil things to their enemies. “We have to deal with them in their (violent, evil) way of thinking”. They are all people, Francis, and the majority of the RIs are capable of forgiving people and responding to mercy with mercy. During the talks about stopping aggression in Syria, do people actually listen to each other, what their needs are? This would be the beginning of a merciful communication. Instead, the communication may be a lot of vitriol, and then no one listens. Then when it fails, they say communication did not work, “they only understand violence”.

I do not understand your problem with this passage. What would you like to see have happened?

I think it would have been more merciful for Peter to gently provide the news that she had just lost her husband, and then in the moment put her own loss as more important than his own anger about being cheated. Indeed, Peter’s behavior does not appear to communicate forgiveness. Like I said, no Church authority today would behave like that. We can give the benefit of the doubt to Peter by believing that the story was written down a bit differently than it actually happened.

No, they do not seem to engage much with the RI ideas. It seems more oriented toward educating non-Moslems about Islam from their (ING’s) point of view.

Not that there is anything wrong with that, you understand; it’s just not information which will help someone to resist radicalization.

Emphasizing that Allah is merciful, Francis, helps people resist radicalization. Radicalization is about acting on injustice in a violent way, which is not reflective of a merciful God. Radicalization warps mercy, it puts it aside.

On a side note, do you agree that “Do unto others” means giving people the benefit of the doubt?

Blessings!

 

[St_Francis]

Good Morning Francis,
This is about justice from all points of view. Everyone involved has suffered injustice, and many involved have also acted unjustly. Depending on whose side people are on, they have a tendency to emphasize the injustice that happened to their own, and the injustices carried out by the other - this is all public, and private.

There was a story I read about a sniper who shot three RIs who were about to kill two villagers.

Now, what would the sniper do differently if he were doing as you propose? Because all along, you have been saying we need to understand (altho our understanding may be false), we need to forgive, etc. But you haven’t explained how this works in real life, and that’s where you lose me.

All people of all governments should be concerned about mercy. It is the way we are to walk. Do you see what I mean? We are needing a complete change in mindset.

How will that come about? Where will it start? How will it spread? What will we do about those governments who refuse the forgiveness model?

And it also may seem unjust that they do not do more, right? So we go back to the question, “Why don’t they do more?”. There is an answer; one that eventually leads to the finding that people are doing what they think is best.

Well, I don’t want to bring another element into our conversation, because for me, this is a very wide-ranging issue.

Well, the Spirit guides us, hopefully, as to when the time is right to focus on forgiveness, but I agree, there are immediate concerns.

And the immediate concerns are what I am talking about.

But do you see? If those acting governments and institutions engage with forgiveness in mind, the whole picture transforms. We Christians and others who see the same can encourage this.

I certainly think that every Christian should pray for peace in the world. However, What you are describing is like an imaginary utopia. Even when all of Europe was almost entirely Catholic, we did not have a situation such as you describe.

I suppose the same could be said by a Saudi citizen, if a Church is allowed to be constructed over there. It is already bad enough that our troops were there, he might see that a Church would be the beginning of a conquest.

And they don’t permit the building of churches in SA.

Let’s go back to “Do unto others as he would have them do unto us.” Would we prefer that the Saudi citizen give voice to the maligned Christian who says “we have a Church in Saudi Arabia now, the beginning of the conversion of the Arabian Peninsula has begun”, or do we give voice to the Christian who is grateful to the Saudi government for allowing resident Christians a place of worship? Once you have answered this, turn it around.

TBH, “giving voice to” this or that seems like some weird smokescreen. Let’s listen to peaceful Moslems explain their ideas about their religion, and not “give voice to” those nasty be headers and defers of the girls they turn into sex slaves.

Even from your point of view, how can you understand so you can forgive them if you don’t understand what they are thinking? Which ideas they are acting upon? What in their minds justifies their horrific actions?

And from my point of view, the giving voice to point is moot. We should be searching for *truth, *not hiding from the aspects of truth we find distasteful or unconducive to our plans.

This is the way that people have justified doing very evil things to their enemies. “We have to deal with them in their (violent, evil) way of thinking”.

Did I say that? No. I did not. I said in order to do something about ISIS, we need to understand them, but use that understanding not to descend to their level, as I *specified *that our actions must remain within the bounds of morality.

The fact that some people might use the truth to justify doing something bad does not justify hiding the truth. For example, I can find out where sex offenders live and what they were convicted of. The allows me to protect my children. Maybe someone will use that information to harm the sex offender; should we stop allowing the information to be public?

They are all people, Francis, and the majority of the RIs are capable of forgiving people and responding to mercy with mercy. During the talks about stopping aggression in Syria, do people actually listen to each other, what their needs are? This would be the beginning of a merciful communication. Instead, the communication may be a lot of vitriol, and then no one listens. Then when it fails, they say communication did not work, “they only understand violence”.

ISIS had been clear about what it wants and what it’s willing to do to get it. How do you suggest we get from where we are to where you think we can go?

I think it would have been more merciful for Peter to gently provide the news that she had just lost her husband, and then in the moment put her own loss as more important than his own anger about being cheated.

Wow, that is something I have never heard before!

Who killed Ananias? Was it **St **Peter, our first pope, commissioned by Christ Himself?

Who were Ananias and Sapphira cheating? What did St Peter say about their money?

What did St Peter say Sapphira did wrong?

I cannot understand how you got from the plain words of the text to where you ended up.

… …

continued below

 

[St_Francis]

continued from above

Emphasizing that Allah is merciful, Francis, helps people resist radicalization.

If a parent gives a child a really good grounding in apologetics, the child will have many arguments against those of the radicals.

If a parent only teaches that Allah is merciful, the radicals have only to knock down one idea.

Radicalization is about acting on injustice in a violent way,

In your opinion. In the opinion of the radical Islamists, not so much. It is in accord with Allah’a will.

which is not reflective of a merciful God. Radicalization warps mercy, it puts it aside.

On a side note, do you agree that “Do unto others” means giving people the benefit of the doubt?

That depends on how much doubt is available to give them.

Blessings!

God’s blessings to you, too

 

[OneSheep]

Good Morning Josie,

I can try to relate to those who kill, but in all honesty I do not think I can truly understand it. The only way I could possible understand it is for self defense.

A huge part of relating is admitting the hate, as you have done. It is the seeing someone else as evil or dispensable. The rest takes admitting why we don’t carry out murder while the next guy does. To me, it has been worthwhile to go through this. Why do I not murder when I hate? I could answer “because I am not that kind of person.” Now, if I stay with that answer I am condoning my own being in some way in contrast to others, it is a mere evaluation. It explains nothing. A deeper look provides more awareness.

I have not been on a mosquito killing-spree. I only kill them because they are pests, they are not human. If these sociopaths think of humans in the same way as we think of mosquitoes then they have a dark soul, only an empty dark soul, could carry out such sick behavior as mass murdering, especially when they kill young children. Even the thought of it makes me sick inside. I do not wish to judge their behaviors, but really how does understanding them better help their soul?

Well, we may not want to judge, but we very naturally do so, right? Judging is the activity of the healthy conscience. Jesus said “do not judge”, but what it means is not to hang onto judging; we drop the judging by understanding and forgiving.

My understanding the sociopath does not help his soul, but it does help me forgive him. If I am saying he has a “dark, empty soul” I am condemning him, I am expressing a negative feeling I have for him, but this is not understanding. He thinks of humans as mosquitoes because of the automatic activity of his mind; our mind dehumanizes those we condemn and those who stand in the way of what we desperately want. In the case of “IS”, both of those factors are operating.

Dehumanization/demonization of others in the mind is not willed by the person, it is an automatic reaction that happens to all of us. We only think it is willed because once it happens, the illusion that the other is evil “makes sense”. The people of “IS” are living in an illusion. Sociopaths are simply ignorant, they have little access to knowing the deeper value of people.

I think you see the human side of things, and not the spiritual side, and I am looking at the spiritual side. The human spirit is alive in us and at the center of it is our heart.

CCC 368 “The spiritual tradition of the Church also emphasizes the heart, in the biblical sense of the depths of one’s being, where the person decides for or against God.”

In my opinion it is impossible to separate the human side from the spiritual side, it is all integrated.

When you have decided to murder someone without a just cause, clearly you are deciding against God and His laws.

Well, most murderers think that their own cause is “just”, though the cause may be as shallow as not wanting any witnesses. They are protecting themselves in some way, and they see no value in the victim, who has the potential to stand in the way of something they want, freedom from indictment. I am not saying, though, that such a person even values God’s laws. His not valuing God’s laws is part of his ignorance.

In my way of thinking, I would ask God to have mercy on a murderer’s soul as only God can heal the soul, and your way of thinking you would try to understand him yourself and have a merciful heart towards a sociopath, and you think finding a cure is the answer.

Only God can heal his soul, yes, and I do pray for them. God heals people through people, right? God heals people in hospitals through doctors and nurses. He heals people in Churches through the faithful. Healing is not limited to this, but it is a means. We are His instruments.

What if the reason he kills is because the devil has taken hold of his heart? No amount of your forgiveness can heal that. I would put it in God’s Hands.

We have to be very careful in ascribing anything to the devil, as such ascribing may spurn us to throw up our hands and think we have no way to change things but prayer. How can we ever know this action on the part of the devil? The other problem with saying it is a matter of possession is that we leave out the aspect of personal responsibility. People are to be held responsible for their choices, we must own our choices. The person who killed Fr. Hamel was not responsible for the dehumanization blindness that occurred in his mind, but he was responsible for making the choice to kill.

We could also say that the murderer was responsible for not addressing his own blindness, taking the steps to forgive, but in order to take such steps he would have to have the self awareness to know that he was living with the illusion that Fr. Hamel (and all Christian enemies) are evil, disposable, of no value, etc. This takes more self-awareness than most people have.

Hope that helped clarify, if not, I can explain further if you have the patience to read my response. I work with young people at my parish, and I don’t have the opportunity to get into any kind of depth like this with them, I tend to support the faith presented to them by their own parents, and do not get into any of this “understanding” aspect of forgiveness, as they do not have the life experience to understand. In addition, they are in the process of some pretty intense conscience formation. If they are seeing i.e. drug abuse and theft as evil acts carried out by “bad people”, and they want to be “good”, then this is a very appropriate and healthy spirituality. Forgiveness is more superficial at their age; they have limited experiences and knowledge.

In other words, it is nice to have the opportunity to go into more depth. Thank you.

 

[OneSheep]

What I was saying is that** it is possible **because of Jesus Christ God’s Son, for this murderer to be healed, but a person like a murderer will not come to Jesus Christ on his own, he will need our prayers. Yes I agree nothing is impossible for God, but how can a sinner turn his life around without the graces he needs to make that choice? The answer is in our prayers, for when we pray God listens to our hearts and prayers.

Well, grace is a free gift. Does God ever withhold grace? I don’t have the image of a God that picks and chooses who he offers grace; rather, people choose to make use of grace offered them. So, God offering His grace? Given. People choosing to accept the gift? Not given! They need our prayers, and our care.

We need to ask God to have mercy on the killer of the priest, it is God’s forgiveness that is needed, not our forgiveness of this person.

Our own forgiveness is called for if we hold something against the person, remember? God always forgives.

We need to pray “Lord have mercy”. Too much emphasis is being placed on the human side, we need to say “Have mercy on him Lord and forgive him” when someone does evil to another, Jesus Christ is the one who heals us and forgives, He is the one who died on the cross for us.

What you are saying leads to an interesting question. Why do we pray “Lord have mercy”, while we say, as a given, that God is always merciful? I’m thinking that such prayers help us spiritually, they give us solace. A priest once told us, “Pray as if your prayers are already answered.”

Thank you! I am glad you are enjoying my comments and questions. Hopefully we are making progress on understanding each other better.

Yes, we are making progress! Clarifications help a lot.

 

[JosieN]

.

I am replying to your last posting.

You keep repeating that God always forgives, if that is true, then why are there people in hell? The children of Fatima were given a vision of people in hell, I know they were telling the truth. Other saints have also had vision of people in hell. Obviously some sins are not forgiven, or they would not be in hell. So I really do not know how you can say that.

How do you apply your way of thinking to a doctor who performs abortions? The babies are innocent, they have caused no one any harm, the doctors know they are alive and growing in the mother. Are they sociopaths? Where does this kind of evil come from, when a doctor who is to protect life and cure people, can cut up and kill a defenseless growing child in a mother’s body, and not feel remorse or horror at what he has done? What motivates this kind of person? Is it money? If it is money then how do you reconcile with this kind of killing? You mention mercy so often in your replies, where is the doctor’s mercy for an unborn child that was murdered before it was born?

There are too many horrible things like abortion, happening in this world, and they are caused by the evil in man’s heart. The more evil actions they do, the easier it is to do them again, they become like possessed people, they lose the good inside of them. They need Jesus Christ to heal their souls. We are human and are not able to get into a person’s heart, God’s power is far greater, but they must want help and ask for His forgiveness and be sorry for what they have done.

I hope you can understand what I am saying. We need to open our eyes to the truth behind the killings, and see it for what it is. It is evil inside the human spirit that allows such things to happen, if good was in the heart of all people, do you think the murder of this innocent priest would have happened or that abortions of preborn babies would exist? Would sociopaths kill innocent children? I will continued to ask for God’s help and forgiveness for those who are in most need of Jesus’s mercy, and I will pray for the conversion of souls, as I believe this is what God wants us to do.

I hope I have answered enough of your questions and made myself clear. Thank you for your all replies.

 

[OneSheep]

Good Afternoon Francis,

There was a story I read about a sniper who shot three RIs who were about to kill two villagers.

Now, what would the sniper do differently if he were doing as you propose? Because all along, you have been saying we need to understand (altho our understanding may be false), we need to forgive, etc. But you haven’t explained how this works in real life, and that’s where you lose me.

We can hope that the sniper was doing his job with the mindset of having forgiven his enemies. It would be difficult for me to second-guess the decision of the sniper. A person can forgive but still be active in defensive action.

How will that come about? Where will it start? How will it spread? What will we do about those governments who refuse the forgiveness model?

Goodness me, Francis! A government refusing sounds like others would be requesting or trying to coerce. I’m talking about something that happens between people; and government leaderships are groups of people. It is a change of mindset over time, not a treaty, in my thinking. Do you remember people in the USSR and the US starting to warm up to each other? It is something that can happen from the ground up.

I certainly think that every Christian should pray for peace in the world. However, What you are describing is like an imaginary utopia. Even when all of Europe was almost entirely Catholic, we did not have a situation such as you describe.

Thinking that Europe united as Catholic was indicative of the Kingdom is a bit misguided, I think. There was so much injustice and discord, persecution and prejudice.

Pope JP II said, “If you want peace, work for justice”, but this is very difficult where everyone is experiencing injustice and everyone thinks the injustices against himself are the most important. What is more real and lasting is, “If you want peace, work for reconciliation.” This is what the Kingdom involves, Francis, reconciliation.

Even from your point of view, how can you understand so you can forgive them if you don’t understand what they are thinking? Which ideas they are acting upon? What in their minds justifies their horrific actions?

At the risk of being horribly repetitive, we address all the possibilities of their thinking.

And from my point of view, the giving voice to point is moot. We should be searching for *truth, *not hiding from the aspects of truth we find distasteful or unconducive to our plans.

Here is the Truth, Francis: God is infinitely merciful. He always waits for us, forgives us, understands us, and wishes reconciliation among all peoples. This is the starting point. You agree that this is Truth, right? Would you like to add something else?

Did I say that? No. I did not. I said in order to do something about ISIS, we need to understand them, but use that understanding not to descend to their level, as I *specified *that our actions must remain within the bounds of morality.

yes, you did not say that. What does it mean “not to descend to their level”?

ISIS had been clear about what it wants and what it’s willing to do to get it. How do you suggest we get from where we are to where you think we can go?

The Church can speak as one body and forgive.

Who killed Ananias? Was it **St **Peter, our first pope, commissioned by Christ Himself?

What we know is that Ananias died; we don’t know what killed him, it may have been stress. What we can gather from the story as told was that his wife was not gently given the news that her husband had died. Like I said, if what had occurred in that room were to take place in the Vatican today, it would end badly for the institution’s coffers. Imagine what the modern news media would do with it!

That said, giving Peter the benefit of the doubt by adding that the actual events were not accurately described,it was appropriate at the time for Peter to do what he did,. As described, though, what he did was atrocious by today’s standards for charitable behavior.

So you see, we would not want Muslim people to designate the scene as an example of Christian’s ideas of mercy and charity. It is more of a scene that calls for some apologetics. Peter’s actions as described can be explained in light of the fact that all of us are capable of being inconsiderate and abusive when we think we have been cheated. Peter was human, his actions in that case were not ones by which to be inspired.

Do you notice a parallel? If we take the story as presented, Peter saw an injustice, and he became blinded by his resentment. All of us are subject to this blindness.

 

[OneSheep]

I am replying to your last posting.

You keep repeating that God always forgives, if that is true, then why are there people in hell?

If you were to share the image of God I presented, you would know that If there is anyone in hell, it is because they choose to be there, not because God has not forgiven. Again, I am not saying your image is incorrect. Neither is mine.

The children of Fatima were given a vision of people in hell, I know they were telling the truth. Other saints have also had vision of people in hell. Obviously some sins are not forgiven, or they would not be in hell. So I really do not know how you can say that.

These are private revelations, they are not required to be believed by Christians.

How do you apply your way of thinking to a doctor who performs abortions? The babies are innocent, they have caused no one any harm, the doctors know they are alive and growing in the mother. Are they sociopaths?
Where does this kind of evil come from, when a doctor who is to protect life and cure people, can cut up and kill a defenseless growing child in a mother’s body, and not feel remorse or horror at what he has done? What motivates this kind of person? Is it money? If it is money then how do you reconcile with this kind of killing? You mention mercy so often in your replies, where is the doctor’s mercy for an unborn child that was murdered before it was born?

Well, it is possible that a doctor who does abortions is a sociopath, but I’d be willing to wager that it is not common. I think that many doctors who perform convenience abortions are blind to the value of unborn children. They use the dehumanized terms, i.e. “products of conception” “fetus” etc. There are also probably some doctors convinced that if they do not perform the abortion, the mother may go off and have a back-alley one and they both end up dead. Such a doctor may value the life of the unborn and grieve the loss; they live in despair without seeing a way out. We can pray for all of the people involved, that they may be able to see better alternatives and the gravity of what they are doing.

The doctors are trying to do what they think is best. Look here for a more thorough discussion:

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=853661

There are too many horrible things like abortion, happening in this world, and they are caused by the evil in man’s heart. The more evil actions they do, the easier it is to do them again, they become like possessed people, they lose the good inside of them.

This is an acceptable view in the Church in my observations, it has its place. However, we don’t have to believe this way. We can see people as good, and as St. Augustine said (today is his feast day!) “It is through the Spirit that we see that whatever exists in any way is good.” He was talking about people and things, not actions.

They need Jesus Christ to heal their souls. We are human and are not able to get into a person’s heart, God’s power is far greater, but they must want help and ask for His forgiveness and be sorry for what they have done.

Yes!

I hope you can understand what I am saying. We need to open our eyes to the truth behind the killings, and see it for what it is. It is evil inside the human spirit that allows such things to happen,

This would be condemning something about people, which is an understandable view, but not the only way of looking at our existence.

if good was in the heart of all people, do you think the murder of this innocent priest would have happened or that abortions of preborn babies would exist?

Yes, it can occur because people become blinded, and people are born ignorant. Do you see the importance of what Jesus said in all of this? Those who crucified Jesus were well intended. They were blind, but well-intended. They did not know what they were doing.

Would sociopaths kill innocent children? I will continued to ask for God’s help and forgiveness for those who are in most need of Jesus’s mercy, and I will pray for the conversion of souls, as I believe this is what God wants us to do.

I think we covered sociopathy already, but yes, we are to pray!

I hope I have answered enough of your questions and made myself clear. Thank you for your all replies.

I think that you have made it clear that you don’t see how what I saying adds up, but that is okay! I tried, but you are expressing some very natural resistance. We are naturally driven to hang onto resentment of doctors who do abortions, sociopaths, murderers, etc. Such “hanging on” serves to motivate us not to do what they do, at least that is my understanding of the purpose of resentment itself.

Blessings, Josie. It has been an interesting conversation!

 

[JosieN]

Originally Posted by OneSheep

If you were to share the image of God I presented, you would know that If there is anyone in hell, it is because they choose to be there, not because God has not forgiven. Again, I am not saying your image is incorrect. Neither is mine.

It is hard for me to believe that anyone would choose to be in hell.

These are private revelations, they are not required to be believed by Christians.

If I do not believe what they have told us about hell being real and that they saw the people burning in hell, then I am saying they must be lying. I do not think saints would lie,

Well, it is possible that a doctor who does abortions is a sociopath, but I’d be willing to wager that it is not common. I think that many doctors who perform convenience abortions are blind to the value of unborn children. They use the dehumanized terms, i.e. “products of conception” “fetus” etc. There are also probably some doctors convinced that if they do not perform the abortion, the mother may go off and have a back-alley one and they both end up dead. Such a doctor may value the life of the unborn and grieve the loss; they live in despair without seeing a way out. We can pray for all of the people involved, that they may be able to see better alternatives and the gravity of what they are doing.

The doctors are trying to do what they think is best. Look here for a more thorough discussion:

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=853661

The fact that they try to dehumanize and make the babies in the mothers body seem less than human, means they are purposely trying not to feel guilt over their actions, this is very wrong, they know better, it is a life and they know it. Whatever reason they come up with for performing abortions can not be justified or made to seem good, it is wrong and evil to kill innocent preborn babies.

This is an acceptable view in the Church in my observations, it has its place. However, we don’t have to believe this way. We can see people as good, and as St. Augustine said (today is his feast day!) “It is through the Spirit that we see that whatever exists in any way is good.” He was talking about people and things, not actions.

I am not sure what you mean by this, If people are good, then their actions should be good also.

This would be condemning something about people, which is an understandable view, but not the only way of looking at our existence.

Yes, it can occur because people become blinded, and people are born ignorant. Do you see the importance of what Jesus said in all of this? Those who crucified Jesus were well intended. They were blind, but well-intended. They did not know what they were doing.

I agree people are blinded and ignorant. But who is blinding them and making them ignorant? I think we agreed on this before when we discussed the works of mercy, we learned that we must instruct the ignorant, so that they will not become blind and be led astray and away from the true teachings of Jesus Christ as it is written in the Holy Bible.

I think we covered sociopathy already, but yes, we are to pray!

I think that you have made it clear that you don’t see how what I saying adds up, but that is okay! I tried, but you are expressing some very natural resistance. We are naturally driven to hang onto resentment of doctors who do abortions, sociopaths, murderers, etc. Such “hanging on” serves to motivate us not to do what they do, at least that is my understanding of the purpose of resentment itself.

It is not resentment I feel for those who commit horrifying acts like sociopaths, abortion doctors, and murderers. I feel a sadness for them because their souls are in danger of being lost for all eternity, and I feel a sadness for those they have hurt, I feel a sadness for the fact that they could turn their lives around and change them for the good if only they accepted Jesus Christ and asked for His help. It does not have to be this way. Jesus Christ died on the cross and suffered for us, so sins can be forgiven, they must turn to Jesus for His forgiveness. I can try my best to say they need to repent and pray for their souls, but in the end it is their choice and they have a free will to live their life the way they chose. You want us to understand their actions better, but I want them to understand what they are doing is wrong and repent.

IBlessings, Josie. It has been an interesting conversation!

May God Bless you also.

 

[OneSheep]

Good Morning!

It is hard for me to believe that anyone would choose to be in hell.

We definitely agree on that!

If I do not believe what they have told us about hell being real and that they saw the people burning in hell, then I am saying they must be lying. I do not think saints would lie,

We don’t have to believe that saints lie about their visions. What the Church says is that we do not have to believe that what was in their visions was a reality for us. The visions were meaningful to the saints, and they can be meaningful to others, but visions are not orthodoxy.

The fact that they try to dehumanize and make the babies in the mothers body seem less than human, means they are purposely trying not to feel guilt over their actions, this is very wrong, they know better, it is a life and they know it. Whatever reason they come up with for performing abortions can not be justified or made to seem good, it is wrong and evil to kill innocent preborn babies.

Do you see what you are doing? You are bringing up things I did not address, which shows that your healthy conscience is working and active. The rule in your conscience is “we are not to try to remain ignorant or blind”; and this is a really great rule, and I completely agree with it. When we bring up chosen ignorance, we are bringing in something new, a new layer.

So, we go back to the question, “Why does the doctor choose to remain blind or ignorant?” There is, of course, the possibility that he does not know he is ignorant. He may resist assertions about the humanity of the unborn as those held by people who are mean-spirited, so his mind is closed to any information from them. He may be totally immersed in the ideology of population control, and the ideology he shares is supported through affiliations and upheld as a criteria for membership; he fears changing his mind and no longer being in the in-group. He may have an underlying fear of having no job if he changes his mind about his acts. It would be hard to list all the additional possibilities, but in all cases it can be shown that people choose blindness and ignorance from a position of blindness or ignorance. They do not know what they are doing.

I am not sure what you mean by this, If people are good, then their actions should be good also.

Good people can make bad choices, Josie. All of us have done both bad things and good things, but what we do does not change our basic nature, which from Genesis we know as good. We do not create ourselves, we have already been created. It is true that a person’s choice to become addicted is in a sense “creating” a very awful condition within, but it does not change his basic nature. He will naturally suffer, which will hopefully steer him in the right direction.

I agree people are blinded and ignorant. But who is blinding them and making them ignorant? I think we agreed on this before when we discussed the works of mercy, we learned that we must instruct the ignorant, so that they will not become blind and be led astray and away from the true teachings of Jesus Christ as it is written in the Holy Bible.

Well, we are born ignorant, and why this is so is a mystery, right? I can explain why automatic blindness is part of our God-given nature, if you want to hear it. Yes, we should do what we can to instruct the ignorant and point out blindness.

It is not resentment I feel for those who commit horrifying acts like sociopaths, abortion doctors, and murderers.

A lack of resentment would be unusual, Josie, but I will take your word for it. Very often it takes me some time to realize that I resent someone, that I feel something negative about certain people. Resentment is normal and natural. In addition, I am subject to denial, I don’t want to resent or hate people! I resist the admission, but I find it very freeing to admit my resentment or hatred and take it from there. I resented the murderer of Fr. Hamel before I took the steps to forgive. Resentment is a flag for an opportunity to forgive someone.

I feel a sadness for them because their souls are in danger of being lost for all eternity, and I feel a sadness for those they have hurt, I feel a sadness for the fact that they could turn their lives around and change them for the good if only they accepted Jesus Christ and asked for His help. It does not have to be this way. Jesus Christ died on the cross and suffered for us, so sins can be forgiven, they must turn to Jesus for His forgiveness. I can try my best to say they need to repent and pray for their souls, but in the end it is their choice and they have a free will to live their life the way they chose. You want us to understand their actions better, but I want them to understand what they are doing is wrong and repent.

Your sadness is a reflection that your heart goes out to them. We both want them to understand that what they are doing is wrong, and that they repent.

May God Bless you also.

Thank you, Josie

 

[St_Francis]

Good Afternoon Francis,

We can hope that the sniper was doing his job with the mindset of having forgiven his enemies. It would be difficult for me to second-guess the decision of the sniper. A person can forgive but still be active in defensive action.

Can you see that the military should understand the theology/ideology under which those they are fighting operate?

Goodness me, Francis! A government refusing sounds like others would be requesting or trying to coerce. I’m talking about something that happens between people; and government leaderships are groups of people. It is a change of mindset over time, not a treaty, in my thinking. Do you remember people in the USSR and the US starting to warm up to each other? It is something that can happen from the ground up.

So basically, this is a kind of wish.

Thinking that Europe united as Catholic was indicative of the Kingdom is a bit misguided, I think. There was so much injustice and discord, persecution and prejudice.

I seem to have been unclear. My point was that despite the ubiquity of Catholicism, these bad things still existed.

Pope JP II

Actually, Pope Paul VI.

said, “If you want peace, work for justice”, but this is very difficult where everyone is experiencing injustice and everyone thinks the injustices against himself are the most important. What is more real and lasting is, “If you want peace, work for reconciliation.” This is what the Kingdom involves, Francis, reconciliation.

I must most heartily disagree. You seem to be taking a result for a cause and skipping the true foundation of the Kingdom of God, which is Christ Himself and the Church He founded.

Without God’s grace, how will all this reconciliation come about? Not through human effort, except in prayer.

At the risk of being horribly repetitive, we address all the possibilities of their thinking.

Doesn’t listening to them and considering the basis of their thinking come into play at all?

Here is the Truth, Francis: God is infinitely merciful. He always waits for us, forgives us, understands us, and wishes reconciliation among all peoples. This is the starting point. You agree that this is Truth, right? Would you like to add something else?

Of course He wishes for reconciliation among all people, but in the context of loving Him and trusting Him. How do we show that? Through prayer.

yes, you did not say that. What does it mean “not to descend to their level”?

I just meant not doing immoral things. Descending to someone’s level is doing to them as they are doing to you, regardless of the morality or appropriateness of the action.

The Church can speak as one body and forgive.

How do you think that will be taken?

I’m going to address the rest of your post in a separate answer.

What we know is that Ananias died; we don’t know what killed him, it may have been stress. What we can gather from the story as told was that his wife was not gently given the news that her husband had died. Like I said, if what had occurred in that room were to take place in the Vatican today, it would end badly for the institution’s coffers. Imagine what the modern news media would do with it!

That said, giving Peter the benefit of the doubt by adding that the actual events were not accurately described,it was appropriate at the time for Peter to do what he did,. As described, though, what he did was atrocious by today’s standards for charitable behavior.

So you see, we would not want Muslim people to designate the scene as an example of Christian’s ideas of mercy and charity. It is more of a scene that calls for some apologetics. Peter’s actions as described can be explained in light of the fact that all of us are capable of being inconsiderate and abusive when we think we have been cheated. Peter was human, his actions in that case were not ones by which to be inspired.

Do you notice a parallel? If we take the story as presented, Peter saw an injustice, and he became blinded by his resentment. All of us are subject to this blindness.

 

[St_Francis]

we know is that Ananias died; we don’t know what killed him, it may have been stress. What we can gather from the story as told was that his wife was not gently given the news that her husband had died. Like I said, if what had occurred in that room were to take place in the Vatican today, it would end badly for the institution’s coffers. Imagine what the modern news media would do with it!

That said, giving Peter the benefit of the doubt by adding that the actual events were not accurately described,it was appropriate at the time for Peter to do what he did,. As described, though, what he did was atrocious by today’s standards for charitable behavior.

So you see, we would not want Muslim people to designate the scene as an example of Christian’s ideas of mercy and charity. It is more of a scene that calls for some apologetics. Peter’s actions as described can be explained in light of the fact that all of us are capable of being inconsiderate and abusive when we think we have been cheated. Peter was human, his actions in that case were not ones by which to be inspired.

Do you notice a parallel? If we take the story as presented, Peter saw an injustice, and he became blinded by his resentment. All of us are subject to this blindness.

1BUT a certain man named Ananias, with Saphira his wife, sold a piece of land, 2And **by fraud **kept back part of the price of the land, **his wife being privy thereunto: **and bringing a certain part of it, laid it at the feet of the apostles. 3But Peter said: Ananias, why hath Satan tempted thy heart, that thou shouldst **lie to the Holy Ghost, **and by fraud keep part of the price of the land? 4Whilst it remained, did it not remain to thee? and after it was sold, **was it not in thy power? **Why hast thou conceived this thing in thy heart? **Thou hast not lied to men, but to God. **5And Ananias hearing these words, fell down, and gave up the ghost. And there came great fear upon all that heard it. 6And the young men rising up, removed him, and carrying him out, buried him.

7And it was about the space of three hours after, when his wife, not knowing what had happened, came in. 8And Peter said to her: **Tell me, woman, whether you sold the land for so much? **And she said: Yea, for so much. 9And Peter said unto her: **Why have you agreed together to tempt the Spirit of the Lord? **Behold the feet of them who have buried thy husband are at the door, and *they shall carry thee out. *10Immediately *she fell down before his feet, and gave up the ghost. *And the young men coming in, found her dead: and carried her out, and buried her by her husband. 11And there came great fear upon the whole church, and upon all that heard these things.

Note that Scripture makes it very clear that Ananias and Saphira were sinning against God. They were not cheating anyone: Peter makes that clear when he says the money was theirs. Obviously, the gift was to be given voluntarily—the ECFs suggest that the two had taken a vow to pay all the money, but even the vow would have been voluntary. The sin was in the lie they told, and the text makes this very clear.

Note that Peter also makes it very clear that the sin was committed against God, not against him (Peter) or the community.

Then Saphira comes, and Peter gives her a chance to tell the truth, but she too lies. Now, was it not more merciful for Peter to give her a chance to do the right thing on her own? Had he done as you suggest, she would of course have told the truth, but then it would have been unclear whether she told the truth because her husband had died as the result of lying, or whether she had had a conversion of heart away from her previous plan. That shadow would have hung over her in the community.

I think your analysis stumbles by not considering the facts presented, and by assuming that, because St Peter was very clear in his statements, he was resentful as the result of injustice. His anger was righteous, against a sin against God. This is not an example of someone’s behaving in an unChristian way; this is an example of your imposing your idea of what Christianity “looks like” on the Book offered to us to learn from.

 

[OneSheep]

1BUT a certain man named Ananias, with Saphira his wife, sold a piece of land, 2And **by fraud **kept back part of the price of the land, **his wife being privy thereunto: **and bringing a certain part of it, laid it at the feet of the apostles. 3But Peter said: Ananias, why hath Satan tempted thy heart, that thou shouldst **lie to the Holy Ghost, **and by fraud keep part of the price of the land? 4Whilst it remained, did it not remain to thee? and after it was sold, **was it not in thy power? **Why hast thou conceived this thing in thy heart? **Thou hast not lied to men, but to God. **5And Ananias hearing these words, fell down, and gave up the ghost. And there came great fear upon all that heard it. 6And the young men rising up, removed him, and carrying him out, buried him.

7And it was about the space of three hours after, when his wife, not knowing what had happened, came in. 8And Peter said to her: **Tell me, woman, whether you sold the land for so much? **And she said: Yea, for so much. 9And Peter said unto her: **Why have you agreed together to tempt the Spirit of the Lord? **Behold the feet of them who have buried thy husband are at the door, and *they shall carry thee out. *10Immediately *she fell down before his feet, and gave up the ghost. *And the young men coming in, found her dead: and carried her out, and buried her by her husband. 11And there came great fear upon the whole church, and upon all that heard these things.

Note that Scripture makes it very clear that Ananias and Saphira were sinning against God. They were not cheating anyone: Peter makes that clear when he says the money was theirs. Obviously, the gift was to be given voluntarily—the ECFs suggest that the two had taken a vow to pay all the money, but even the vow would have been voluntary. The sin was in the lie they told, and the text makes this very clear.

Note that Peter also makes it very clear that the sin was committed against God, not against him (Peter) or the community.

Then Saphira comes, and Peter gives her a chance to tell the truth, but she too lies. Now, was it not more merciful for Peter to give her a chance to do the right thing on her own? Had he done as you suggest, she would of course have told the truth, but then it would have been unclear whether she told the truth because her husband had died as the result of lying, or whether she had had a conversion of heart away from her previous plan. That shadow would have hung over her in the community.

I think your analysis stumbles by not considering the facts presented, and by assuming that, because St Peter was very clear in his statements, he was resentful as the result of injustice. His anger was righteous, against a sin against God. This is not an example of someone’s behaving in an unChristian way; this is an example of your imposing your idea of what Christianity “looks like” on the Book offered to us to learn from.

Good Morning Francis,

I look at these two statements, because the rest is relatively insignificant:

1.And it was about the space of three hours after, when his wife, not knowing what had happened, came in.

And Peter told her about her husband this way:

2." Behold the feet of them who have buried thy husband are at the door, and they shall carry thee out."

My own conscience recoils at what Peter did, if this is truly what he did. We may have differences in the formation of our consciences, but I am a bit doubtful of that.

If it was someone else (not of the hierarchy, a ruler of some sort) who said what he did, would you feel the same way?

Try to think of the implications of your answer on this, friend!

 

[OneSheep]

Hello Again!

Can you see that the military should understand the theology/ideology under which those they are fighting operate?

Actually, I don’t. The sniper was operating on what he perceived as a clear intent. Theologies and ideologies are held by people, but clear intent has to be guessed about every individual in every situation.

So basically, this is a kind of wish.

That sounds much more passive than my thinking. It begins with prayer, and prayer turns into action!

I seem to have been unclear. My point was that despite the ubiquity of Catholicism, these bad things still existed.

Yes, but they existed that way 1000 years ago, and civilizations have evolved a great deal since then. The Kingdom is much more capable of being manifest today; I can show how this is the case, that it is indeed in formation.

I must most heartily disagree. You seem to be taking a result for a cause and skipping the true foundation of the Kingdom of God, which is Christ Himself and the Church He founded.

Without God’s grace, how will all this reconciliation come about? Not through human effort, except in prayer

Yes, Christ and the Church are the foundation. I’m not sure what you meant by “result for a cause”.

Reconciliation happens through prayer and human participation. He doesn’t do it for us, even though His grace is present.

Doesn’t listening to them and considering the basis of their thinking come into play at all?

Yes, of course, absolutely! And it is not just listening to them, but doing all one can to gather the underlying feelings and needs in what they are saying. All of these are means of understanding people.

Of course He wishes for reconciliation among all people, but in the context of loving Him and trusting Him. How do we show that? Through prayer.

Yes, we are to pray, but if that prayer does not lead to active efforts to reconcile, then there is something amiss with the prayer, right? What can be said about a person who vehemently prays for shelter but does not make the effort to build one? That he trusted God, but God failed him?

How do you think that will be taken?

Here, I will make a possible statement, please critique. Feel free to hold no punches!

Note, I am not concentrating on eloquence:

"Upon consulting the Bishops of our Holy Church, and in keeping with the works of mercy, we forgive the offenses of the murderer of Fr. Hamel. Our own forgiveness is a matter between each and every one of us and our Lord, but is also a manifestation of our own prayers for reconciliation between all peoples of all faiths and ideologies.

We forgive with humility, and have no intent to insult the victims or those who remain unready to forgive. If our forgiving offends you, we ask for your forgiveness. We are doing what we see is making right our relationship with our infinitely loving, forgiving, merciful Father.

We do this publicly in order to further realize the Kingdom of God."

Looking at it again, I think it would be more powerful as a prayer rather than a statement, but it is a start. Feel free to add/subtract/etc.

Thanks!

 

[OneSheep]

Pope Francis ‏@Pontifex May 11

What we say and how we say it, our every word and gesture, ought to express God’s compassion, tenderness and forgiveness for all.

 

[St_Francis]

Good Morning Francis,

I look at these two statements, because the rest is relatively insignificant:

1.And it was about the space of three hours after, when his wife, not knowing what had happened, came in.

And Peter told her about her husband this way:

2." Behold the feet of them who have buried thy husband are at the door, and they shall carry thee out."

My own conscience recoils at what Peter did, if this is truly what he did. We may have differences in the formation of our consciences, but I am a bit doubtful of that.

If it was someone else (not of the hierarchy, a ruler of some sort) who said what he did, would you feel the same way?

Try to think of the implications of your answer on this, friend!

I look at something like this (not this per se) and say, “I don’t understand why this happened or why the Saint said this, but I will pray about it and try to understand.”

For this passage, I wonder why Ananias lied… how St Peter knew… I assume God at least permitted Ananias to die at that moment. I recall that Christ said one must hate his brothers and sisters to be Christ’s disciple, and consider that St Petet said Ananias tried to lie to God, that Ananias loved something more than he loved Christ, that Saphira was somehow more concerned about her husband or the money than she was about Christ.

Then I consider an article I read about the ECFs and their ontological approach.

Back to the imagery of morality. If you speak of right and wrong in terms of being, it is generally expressed as either moving towards the path of well-being-eternal-being, or moving away from it, that is, taking a path towards non-being. What does the path of non-being look like? It looks like disintegration, a progressive “falling apart” of existence. The New Testament uses the term phthora (“corruption”) to describe this. Phthora is what happens to a body when it dies. Death, in the New Testament, is often linked to sin (“sin and death”). It is the result of moving away from God, destroying our communion with Him.

Sin *is *the corruption of death. Wow…

He goes on to talk about the ontological unity of creation, and I think… the Apostles were growing a living unity–we see the Church as a separate being, one most intimately United with Christ-- and considering sin as the corruption of death, how eould God view sinning to enter His Church?

Two of the Acts of Spiritual Mercy are to instruct the ignorant, and to admonish the sinner. Christ Himself told the Apostles to shake from their sandals the dust of the towns where the people would not hear them.

 

[St_Francis]

Hello Again!

Actually, I don’t. The sniper was operating on what he perceived as a clear intent. Theologies and ideologies are held by people, but clear intent has to be guessed about every individual in every situation.

That sounds much more passive than my thinking. It begins with prayer, and prayer turns into action!

Yes, but they existed that way 1000 years ago, and civilizations have evolved a great deal since then. The Kingdom is much more capable of being manifest today; I can show how this is the case, that it is indeed in formation.

Please do show this.

Yes, Christ and the Church are the foundation. I’m not sure what you meant by “result for a cause”.

You see reconciliation of all as a cause of the Kingdom of God; I see it as a result.

Reconciliation happens through prayer and human participation. He doesn’t do it for us, even though His grace is present.

Right, without His grace, people cannot forgive, but they also cannot accept forgiveness.

Yes, of course, absolutely! And it is not just listening to them, but doing all one can to gather the underlying feelings and needs in what they are saying. All of these are means of understanding people.

In order to truly understand the RIs, I believe it is necessary to understand their theology. What people think does affect their feelings and what they perceive as their needs. Even the Vatican, before meetings with members of other ecclesial communities for the purpose of evangelization, believes it is important to understand their theology.

Yes, we are to pray, but if that prayer does not lead to active efforts to reconcile, then there is something amiss with the prayer, right? What can be said about a person who vehemently prays for shelter but does not make the effort to build one? That he trusted God, but God failed him?

Here, I will make a possible statement, please critique. Feel free to hold no punches!

Note, I am not concentrating on eloquence:

"Upon consulting the Bishops of our Holy Church, and in keeping with the works of mercy, we forgive the offenses of the murderer of Fr. Hamel. Our own forgiveness is a matter between each and every one of us and our Lord, but is also a manifestation of our own prayers for reconciliation between all peoples of all faiths and ideologies.

We forgive with humility, and have no intent to insult the victims or those who remain unready to forgive. If our forgiving offends you, we ask for your forgiveness. We are doing what we see is making right our relationship with our infinitely loving, forgiving, merciful Father.

We do this publicly in order to further realize the Kingdom of God."

Looking at it again, I think it would be more powerful as a prayer rather than a statement, but it is a start. Feel free to add/subtract/etc.

Sorry, what I meant was how would the announcement of forgiveness be seen by the RIs who perpetrate these types of acts? Do you think it will affect them at all, or be throwing pearls before swine?

Thanks!

Thank you, too